Chelmsford Borough Council

Transcription

1 The Local Government Ombudsman s Annual Review Chelmsford Borough Council for the year ended 3 March 9 The Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) provides a free, independent and impartial service. We consider complaints about the administrative actions of councils and some other authorities. We cannot question what a council has done simply because someone does not agree with it. If we find something has gone wrong, such as poor service, service failure, delay or bad advice, and that a person has suffered as a result, the Ombudsmen aim to get it put right by recommending a suitable remedy. The LGO also uses the findings from investigation work to help authorities provide better public services through initiatives such as special reports, training and annual reviews.

2 Contents of Annual Review Section : Complaints about Chelmsford Borough Council 8/9 3 Introduction 3 Enquiries and complaints received 3 Complaint outcomes 3 Liaison with the Local Government Ombudsman 4 Training in complaint handling 4 Conclusions 4 Section : LGO developments 5 Introduction 5 Council First 5 Statement of reasons: consultation 5 Making Experiences Count (MEC) 5 Training in complaint handling 5 Adult Social Care Self-funding 6 Internal schools management 6 Further developments 6 Appendix : Notes to assist interpretation of the statistics 8/9 7 Appendix : Local authority report 8/9

3 Section : Complaints about Chelmsford Borough Council 8/9 Introduction This annual review provides a summary of the complaints we have dealt with about Chelmsford Borough Council. We have included comments on the authority s performance and complaint-handling arrangements, where possible, so they can assist with your service improvement. I hope that the review will be a useful addition to other information your authority holds on how people experience or perceive your services. Two appendices form an integral part of this review: statistical data for 8/9 and a note to help the interpretation of the statistics. Changes to our way of working and statistics A change in the way we operate means that the statistics about complaints received in 8/9 are not directly comparable with those from 7/8. Since April 8 the new LGO Advice Team has been the single point of contact for all enquiries and new complaints. The number of calls to our service has increased significantly since then. It handles more than 3, calls a month, together with written and ed complaints. Our advisers now provide comprehensive information and advice to callers at the outset with a full explanation of the process and possible outcomes. It enables callers to make a more informed decision about whether putting their complaint to us is an appropriate course of action. Some decide to pursue their complaint direct with the council first. It means that direct comparisons with some of the previous year s statistics are difficult and could be misleading. So this annual review focuses mainly on the 8/9 statistics without drawing those comparisons. Enquiries and complaints received Our Advice Team dealt with enquiries in total about your Council this year. Just under half of these were about planning related matters. The remainder were spread across a broad range of Council services including housing, public finance including local taxation, transport and highways, and benefits. Of the enquiries, six were referred on to the Council to attempt to resolve in the first instance as the complainant had yet to exhaust your complaints procedure, and it seemed that they would not be disadvantaged by doing so before complaining to me if they remained dissatisfied at the end of that process. A further five enquiries were dealt with by providing advice, and the remaining nine were passed on to an investigation team to consider Complaint outcomes I decided six complaints made to me about Chelmsford Borough Council in 8/9. I issued no reports, and there were no local settlements. A local settlement is a complaint where, during the course of our investigation, a council takes or agrees to take some action that we consider to be a satisfactory response to the complaint. In 8/9, 7.4% of all complaints the Ombudsmen decided and which were within our jurisdiction were local settlements. 3

4 I found no fault in five of the six complaints I decided this year, and exercised my discretion to discontinue my involvement in the remaining complaint I dealt with. On occasions where I conclude that there may be some evidence of fault by the Council I use my discretion not to pursue the investigation. This is usually because I am unable to conclude that the fault I have identified resulted in any injustice to the complainant. But there may still be lessons for the Council to draw from such cases. As previously mentioned, this year I closed one complaint against your Council using my discretion. In that case, the Council s website contained incorrect details on its property records. But as I did not consider that it was reasonable for the complainant to have relied on this information in isolation of the property searches which were undertaken I did not feel that there was sufficient injustice caused by this error to warrant a settlement. Liaison with the Local Government Ombudsman The average time taken by the Council to reply to our written enquiries was 5.5 days which continues the improvement over the last three years. I am pleased to note that one of your officers recently attended a seminar at my office when we were able to update Council officers who co-ordinate the responses to our enquiries on recent developments in our service and the way in which we conduct our investigations. I hope that they found the seminar useful. Training in complaint handling Part of our role is to provide advice and guidance about good administrative practice. We offer training courses for all levels of local authority staff in complaints handling and investigation. All courses are presented by experienced investigators. They give participants the opportunity to practise the skills needed to deal with complaints positively and efficiently. We can also provide customised courses to help authorities to deal with particular issues and occasional open courses for individuals from different authorities. I have enclosed some information on the full range of courses available together with contact details for enquiries and bookings. Conclusions I welcome this opportunity to give you my reflections about the complaints my office has dealt with over the past year. I hope that you find the information and assessment provided useful when seeking improvements to your Council s services. Tony Redmond Local Government Ombudsman th floor Millbank Tower Millbank London SWP 4QP June 9 4

5 Section : LGO developments Introduction This annual review also provides an opportunity to bring councils up to date on developments current and proposed in the LGO and to seek feedback. It includes our proposal to introduce a statement of reasons for Ombudsmen decisions. Council First From April 9, the LGO has considered complaints only where the council s own complaints procedure has been completed. Local authorities have been informed of these new arrangements, including some notable exceptions. We will carefully monitor the impact of this change during the course of the year. Statement of reasons: consultation The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 7 made provision for the LGO to publish statements of reasons relating to the individual decisions of an Ombudsman following the investigation of a complaint. The Ombudsmen are now consulting local government on their proposal to use statements of reasons. The proposal is that these will comprise a short summary (about one page of A4) of the complaint, the investigation, the findings and the recommended remedy. The statement, naming the council but not the complainant, would usually be published on our website. We plan to consult local authorities on the detail of these statements with a view to implementing them from October 9. Making Experiences Count (MEC) The new formal, one stage complaint handling arrangement for adult social care was also introduced from April 9. The LGO is looking to ensure that this formal stage is observed by complainants before the Ombudsmen will consider any such complaint, although some may be treated as exceptions under the Council First approach. The LGO also recognises that during the transition from the existing scheme to the new scheme there is going to be a mixed approach to considering complaints as some may have originated before April 9. The LGO will endeavour to provide support, as necessary, through dedicated events for complaints-handling staff in adult social care departments. Training in complaint handling Effective Complaint Handling in Adult Social Care is the latest addition to our range of training courses for local authority staff. This adds to the generic Good Complaint Handling (identifying and processing complaints) and Effective Complaint Handling (investigation and resolution), and courses for social care staff at both of these levels. Demand for our training in complaint handling remains high. A total of 9 courses were delivered in 8/9. Feedback from participants shows that they find it stimulating, challenging and beneficial in their work in dealing with complaints. 5

6 Adult Social Care Self-funding The Health Bill 9 proposes for the LGO to extend its jurisdiction to cover an independent complaints-handling role in respect of self-funded adult social care. The new service will commence in. Internal schools management The Apprenticeship, Skills, Children and Learning Bill (ASCL) 9 proposes making the LGO the host for a new independent complaints-handling function for schools. In essence, we would consider the complaint after the governing body of the school had considered it. Subject to legislation, the new service would be introduced, in pilot form, probably in September. Further developments I hope this information gives you an insight into the major changes happening within the LGO, many of which will have a direct impact on your local authority. We will keep you up to date through LGO Link as each development progresses but if there is anything you wish to discuss in the meantime please let me know. Tony Redmond Local Government Ombudsman th floor Millbank Tower Millbank London SWP 4QP June 9 6

7 Appendix : Notes to assist interpretation of the statistics 8/9 Introduction This year, the annual review only shows 8/9 figures for enquiries and complaints received, and for decisions taken. This is because the change in the way we operate (explained in the introduction to the review) means that these statistics are not directly comparable with statistics from previous years. Table. LGO Advice Team: Enquiries and complaints received This information shows the number of enquiries and complaints received by the LGO, broken down by service area and in total. It also shows how these were dealt with, as follows. Formal/informal prematures: The LGO does not normally consider a complaint unless a council has first had an opportunity to deal with that complaint itself. So if someone complains to the LGO without having taken the matter up with a council, the LGO will usually refer it back to the council as a premature complaint to see if the council can itself resolve the matter. These are formal premature complaints. We now also include informal premature complaints here, where advice is given to the complainant making an enquiry that their complaint is premature. The total of premature complaints shown in this line does not include the number of resubmitted premature complaints (see below). Advice given: These are enquiries where the LGO Advice Team has given advice on why the Ombudsman would not be able to consider the complaint, other than the complaint being premature. For example, the complaint may clearly be outside the Ombudsman s jurisdiction. It also includes cases where the complainant has not given enough information for clear advice to be given, but they have, in any case, decided not to pursue the complaint. Forwarded to the investigative team (resubmitted prematures): These are cases where there was either a formal premature decision, or the complainant was given informal advice that their case was premature, and the complainant has resubmitted their complaint to the Ombudsman after it has been put to the council. These figures need to be added to the numbers for formal/informal premature complaints (see above) to get the full total number of premature complaints. They also needed to be added to the forwarded to the investigative team (new) to get the total number of forwarded complaints. Forwarded to the investigative team (new): These are the complaints that have been forwarded from the LGO Advice Team to the Investigative Team for further consideration. The figures may include some complaints that the Investigative Team has received but where we have not yet contacted the council. 7

8 Table. Investigative Team: Decisions This information records the number of decisions made by the LGO Investigative Team, broken down by outcome, within the period given. This number will not be the same as the number of complaints forwarded from the LGO Advice Team because some complaints decided in 8/9 will already have been in hand at the beginning of the year, and some forwarded to the Investigative Team during 8/9 will still be in hand at the end of the year. Below we set out a key explaining the outcome categories. MI reps: where the LGO has concluded an investigation and issued a formal report finding maladministration causing injustice. LS (local settlements): decisions by letter discontinuing our investigation because action has been agreed by the authority and accepted by the Ombudsman as a satisfactory outcome for the complainant. M reps: where the LGO has concluded an investigation and issued a formal report finding maladministration but causing no injustice to the complainant. NM reps: where the LGO has concluded an investigation and issued a formal report finding no maladministration by the council. No mal: decisions by letter discontinuing an investigation because we have found no, or insufficient, evidence of maladministration. Omb disc: decisions by letter discontinuing an investigation in which we have exercised the Ombudsman s general discretion not to pursue the complaint. This can be for a variety of reasons, but the most common is that we have found no or insufficient injustice to warrant pursuing the matter further. Outside jurisdiction: these are cases which were outside the Ombudsman s jurisdiction. Table 3. Response times These figures record the average time the council takes to respond to our first enquiries on a complaint. We measure this in calendar days from the date we send our letter/fax/ to the date that we receive a substantive response from the council. The council s figures may differ somewhat, since they are likely to be recorded from the date the council receives our letter until the despatch of its response. Table 4. Average local authority response times 8/9 This table gives comparative figures for average response times by authorities in England, by type of authority, within three time bands. 8

9 Appendix : Local Authority Report - Chelmsford BC For the period ending - 3/3/9 LGO Advice Team Enquiries and complaints received Children and family services Housing Benefits Public Finance inc. Local Taxation Planning and building control Transport and highways Other Total Formal/informal premature complaints 6 Advice given 3 5 Forwarded to investigative team (resubmitted prematures) Forwarded to investigative team (new) 5 9 Total 5 Investigative Team Decisions /4/8 / 3/3/9 MI reps LS M reps NM reps No mal Omb disc Outside jurisdiction Total 5 6 Average local authority response times /4/8 to 3/3/9 Response times FIRST ENQUIRIES No. of First Enquiries Avg no. of days to respond /4/8 / 3/3/ / / Types of authority <= 8 days % 9-35 days % > = 36 days % District councils 6 Unitary authorities Metropolitan authorities County councils London boroughs National park authorities